This battle was the largest of the five major U.S. surface engagements since the Second World War, which also include the Battle of Chumonchin Chan
during the Korean War, the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the Battle of Dong Hoi during the Vietnam War, and the Action in the Gulf of Sidra in 1986. It
also marked the U.S. Navy's first exchange of anti-ship missiles by ships.

On 18 April, the U.S. Navy attacked with several groups of surface warships, plus aircraft from the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, and her cruiser
escort, USS Truxtun. The action began with coordinated strikes by two surface groups.

One surface action group, or SAG, consisting of the destroyers USS Merrill and USS Lynde McCormick, plus the amphibious transport dock USS Trenton and
its embarked Marine Air Ground Task Force and the LAMPS (Light Airborne MultiPurpose System) Helicopter Detachment (HSL-44 Det 5) from USS Samuel B.
Roberts, was ordered to destroy the guns and other military facilities on the Sassan oil platform.

Cobra helicopters completed the destruction of enemy resistance. The Marines boarded the platform, and recovered a single wounded survivor (who was
transported to Bahrain), some small arms, and intelligence. The Marines planted explosives, left the platform, and detonated them. The SAG was then
ordered to proceed north to the Rakhsh oil platform to destroy it.

As the SAG departed the Sassan oil field, two Iranian F-4s made an attack run, but broke off when Lynde McCormick locked its fire control radar on the
aircraft. Halfway to the Rahksh oil platform, the attack was called off in an attempt to ease pressure on the Iranians and signal a desire for
de-escalation.

Iran responded by dispatching Boghammar speedboats to attack various targets in the Persian Gulf, including the American-flagged supply ship Willy
Tide, the Panamanian-flagged Scan Bay and the British tanker York Marine. All of these vessels were damaged in different degrees. After the attacks,
A-6E Intruder aircraft launched from CVN 65 were directed to the speedboats by an American frigate. The two aircraft, piloted by "Lizards" Lieutenant
Commander James Engler and Lieutenant Paul Webb, dropped Rockeye cluster bombs on the speedboats, sinking one and damaging several others, which then
fled to the Iranian-controlled island of Abu Musa.[4]

Action continued to escalate. Joshan, an Iranian Combattante II Kaman-class fast attack craft, challenged USS Wainwright and Surface Action Group
Charlie. The commanding officer of Wainwright directed a final warning (of a series of warnings) stating that Joshan was to "stop your engines,
abandon ship, I intend to sink you". Joshan responded by firing a Harpoon missile at them.[5] Simpson responded to the challenge by firing four
Standard missiles, while Wainwright followed with one Standard missile.[6] All missiles hit and destroyed the Iranian ship's superstructure but did
not immediately sink it, so Bagley fired a Harpoon of its own; the missile did not find the target. SAG Charlie closed on Joshan, with Simpson, then
Bagley and Wainwright firing guns to sink the crippled Iranian ship.[5]
Two Iranian F-4 Phantom fighters were orbiting about 48 km away when Wainwright decided to drive them away. Wainwright fired two Extended Range
Standard missiles, one of which detonated near an F-4, blowing off part of its wing and peppering the fuselage with shrapnel. The F-4s withdrew, and
the Iranian pilot landed his damaged airplane at Bandar Abbas.[6]
Fighting continued when the Iranian frigate Sahand departed Bandar Abbas and challenged elements of an American surface group. The frigate was spotted
by two Lizard A-6Es while they were flying surface combat air patrol for USS Joseph Strauss.

Iranian frigate Sahand burning from bow to stern on 18 April 1988 after being attacked.
Sahand fired missiles at the A-6Es, which replied with two Harpoon missiles and four laser-guided Skipper bombs. Joseph Strauss fired a Harpoon. Most,
if not all of the shots scored hits, causing heavy damage and fires. Fires blazing on Sahand's decks eventually reached her munitions magazines,
causing an explosion that sank the vessel.
Late in the day, the Iranian frigate Sabalan, departed from its berth and fired a surface-to-air missile at several A-6Es from VA-95. The Intruders
then dropped a Mark 82 laser-guided bomb into Sabalan‍ '​s stack, crippling the ship and leaving it burning. The Iranian frigate, stern
partially submerged, was taken in tow by an Iranian tug, and was repaired and eventually returned to service. VA-95's aircraft, as ordered, did not
continue the attack. The A-6 pilot who crippled Sabalan, LCDR James Engler, was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross by Admiral William J. Crowe,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for the actions against Sabalan and the Iranian gunboats.[7]
As the retaliation for the attacks, Iran fired Silkworm missiles (suspected to be the HY-4 version) from land bases against SAG Delta in the Strait of
Hormuz and against USS Gary in the northern central Persian Gulf, but all missed due to the evasive maneuvers and use of decoys by the ships. A
missile was probably shot down by Gary‍ '​s 76 mm (3.0 in) gun. The Pentagon and the Reagan Administration later denied that any Silkworm
missile attacks took place probably since it was the only way to keep the situation from escalating further as they had promised before publicly that
any such attacks would merit retaliation against targets on Iranian soil.[8]

All of that is unlike a modern naval engagement with higher technology participants: the danger from attack submarines is immense.

Falklands is closer I think. Remember also that in 1982 a U.K. submarine sunk the primary Argentinian cruiser without ever being engaged or detected.

Regardless of controversies over the sinking, due to disagreement on the exact nature of the Maritime Exclusion Zone and whether General Belgrano had
been returning to port at the time of the sinking, it had a crucial strategic effect: the elimination of the Argentine naval threat. After her loss,
the entire Argentine fleet, with the exception of the conventional submarine ARA San Luis,[59] returned to port and did not leave again during the
fighting. The two escorting destroyers and the battle group centred on the aircraft carrier ARA Veinticinco de Mayo both withdrew from the area,
ending the direct threat to the British fleet that their pincer movement had represented.

Notice the result: one sub attacks successfully, full withdrawal of all surface ships to port. (In a more serious war that wouldn't work, the subs
would just follow them).

Surface ships might be able to operate very close to a homeland which has significant air assets and anti-sub warfare capability running continuously.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
NAH, we have black TRIANGLES that will handle ALL that.

True,

but why bother discussing the rest then?

If your BBT statement got so many stars then people are aware. So one can assume that other governments are/have been aware for some time...
therefore, BBT is old news (tactically speaking)... there must be something that is still as of yet unknown to anybody but the US.

Sorry but this is pro-Russian nonsense.
To start with, the only country (in any imagined war) failing to keep up militarily is the UK. I'm British, so I know a thing or two about our lacking
defenses. We would be heavily reliant on US and NATO support if we were attacked in any way other than by air. The RAF is a considerable force to
reckon with, but we are at risk from subs.

The US also has a greater capability than anyone really acknowledges. You think Groom Lake is just there for fun? You think all the UFO's we see are
really piloted by little green men from another world?

No doubt Russia has certain top secret capabilities too, but it's a fact that they don't invest even half of what the US does in military R&D, they
haven't been able to because they've spent most of recent history warring with everyone and damaging their own development.

In order to have a functioning fleet of almighty subs capable of taking on the USA you need the support structure and leadership. So, even if Russia
is superior with regard to subs, NATO and the US is FAR superior in every other capacity, and could wipe out military control in Russia within days -
if they chose to do that.

Those subs would be rendered useless with a couple of strikes at their command and control facilities, and we no doubt know exactly where they are.

And lets not even get started on cyber warfare. While Russia is still playing games with Internet propaganda teams, the US has probably infected most
of their systems with help from every large western tech company putting components in every piece of tech Russia has ever imported.

No bout it would be messy, and depending on the needs of the west it could (be made to) go on for a while, but the US/NATO would win, regardless of
what subs Russia has.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
NAH, we have black TRIANGLES that will handle ALL that.

True,

but why bother discussing the rest then?

It still maintains the element of surprise and would probably only be used during the threat of nuclear war. This is backed up by the numerous likely
examples of testing at nuclear sites across the US and UK throughout the 80's.

It was developed as a means to retaliate/prevent a nuclear war, hence the speed of flight being the primary factor.

Nuclear warfare has been the biggest threat throughout this period, so it makes sense that any government would invest billions of $'s on defenses
against it, and the capability to retaliate.

What most of us see as "UFO's" meet all of the anticipated needs - logic dictates that the US would have developed it, and have developed it, and have
wanted to keep it at a top secret level because it still holds an advantage that Russia/China cannot match.

I read the subject of this thread and had to laugh out loud. The weapons, ships and planes that Wiki says the US has, is just the stuff that we know
about. There is probably stuff locked away in a bunker somewhere that would blow our minds.

originally posted by: JonStone
I read the subject of this thread and had to laugh out loud. The weapons, ships and planes that Wiki says the US has, is just the stuff that we know
about. There is probably stuff locked away in a bunker somewhere that would blow our minds.

The USA are admitting to stuff like rail guns on Navy ships.

When Gulf War 1 started, the USA went public with the Stealth Bomber. Basically because people saw a bunch of them taking off on bombing missions and
were thinking "what the hell was that"?

I really, really wonder what's in development right now.

What gets me, is that among all the ridiculous conspiracy theories, no one actually asks about real ones. Hardly anyone has asked or speculated what
that half size unmanned shuttle is doing, despite NASA saying "oh yeah, we launched it, and it's on a top secret mission for over a year, but we're
not telling you what it's doing".

Actually no, the F117s were officially disclosed in Operation URGENT FURY.
The B2s were officially operational in 1997.
Scwartzkopf IS rumoured to have turned down AURORA because he said he didn't need it.

The US has a superior nuclear fleet with hydrogen missle silos on board that can hit any point on earth in quick order.
So, we lose, you lose....
We also have carrier and sub killing abilities from multiple platforms along with air wings, hunter killers, missile frigates, destroyers, electronic
warfare, counter radar abilities. etc that are in carrier battle groups. So, good luck with that faulty analysis.
Probably just counter propaganda to get us to waste even more money on overkill and world domination.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.